On the other side of the equation, there appear to be no substantial net gains for the province. The deal doesn’t create something new; it simply changes the ownership of what already exists.

Stephen Harper – who (sadly) has the final say under federal law – has shown clear bias in favour of a foreign takeover. He deliberately belittled the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, and scoffed at the notion that potash is a strategic commodity.

But Mr. Harper is wrong. When one transaction shifts an entire Canadian industry into the hands of a single foreign buyer – that’s a strategic issue!

When that industry is potash which is vital to food production worldwide for generations to come – that’s a strategic issue!

When 53% of the world’s known potash reserves are in Saskatchewan and they’re about to be controlled forever from outside Canada – that’s a strategic issue!

When the transaction is the largest resources sell-off in Canadian history with nothing of significance left in Canadian hands thereafter – that’s a strategic issue!

When any conditions that might be attached to any deal could remain secret and are unenforceable – that’s a strategic issue!

Standing up for Canadian-controlled business champions is not “anti-business”. It’s just not being a pushover.

Those who argue that governments should just “get out of the way” should recall the similar argument made 15 years ago about deregulating financial institutions and allowing bank mergers. What a mess we’d have today if that bad advice had been taken.

If Mr. Harper forces an unwanted decision on potash down Saskatchewan’s throat, the Conservatives had better stand ready to pick up the tab for Saskatchewan’s losses.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Just a kindly note for all the revisionists (and not-so-journalistic journalists) out there...

From the latest Goodale Weekly Update:

For the week beginning October 18th, 2010

MR. HARPER’S DEFICIT BEGAN BEFORE HIS RECESSION!

Last week, while Parliament was adjourned for Thanksgiving, the Harper government dribbled out its Financial Statements for the 2009-2010 fiscal year (which ended last March), and its mid-term Update for this current year.

Years of precedent dictate that these key fiscal documents are presented in Parliament, with a full explanation from the Finance Minister and immediate scrutiny by M.P.’s.

But such honest transparency is non-existent in this government.

The nasty fact the Conservatives are trying to downplay is the size of their deficit. It’s two billion dollars higher than they predicted. At $55.6 billion, this is the worst federal deficit in Canadian history.

That has to be embarrassing for a so-called “conservative” government. They are the biggest-borrowing, most-indebted, highest-spending regime ever.

Mr. Harper blames it all on the recession. But the truth is, this Harper/Conservative deficit began BEFORE the recession, not because of it!

As soon as he seized office in 2006, Mr. Harper began slopping money around like there was no tomorrow. His federal spending ballooned by 18% (three times the rate of inflation) BEFORE there was any hint of a global downturn.

Mr. Harper also eliminated all the contingency reserves and prudence factors that Liberals had built into federal budgeting as fiscal “shock absorbers” against sudden nasty surprises – like maybe a collapsing housing market in the US or the failure of some big American banks.

When those things actually happened in 2008, there was no cushion to fall back on, because Mr. Harper had squandered it in his previous two years. So Conservative red ink just gets deeper.

And hard-pressed middle-class families are left to fend for themselves on such necessities as family care-giving to tend to a disabled child or an aging parent, the high cost of higher education and adequate pensions for a decent retirement.

Larry. Larry... Larry: Either you blame Iggy - with a VALID reason (which you don't obviously have), or you go on with your PMO claptrap and spin your way into a line that obviously states the truth: IT WAS HARPER-CON FOREIGN POLICY THAT COST US THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL SEAT.